Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38504332›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2024

Contigs directed gene annotation (ConDiGA) for accurate protein sequence database construction in metaproteomics.

Enhui Wu, Vijini Mallawaarachchi, Jinzhi Zhao, Yi Yang, Hebin Liu, Xiaoqing Wang, Chengpin Shen, Yu Lin, Liang Qiao

Open access · goldAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Enhui Wu *Department of Chemistry, and Shanghai Stomatological Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Vijini Mallawaarachchi *School of Computing, College of Engineering, Computing and Cybernetics, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia.
Jinzhi ZhaoDepartment of Chemistry, and Shanghai Stomatological Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Yi YangDepartment of Chemistry, and Shanghai Stomatological Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Hebin LiuShanghai Omicsolution Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Xiaoqing WangShanghai Omicsolution Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Chengpin ShenShanghai Omicsolution Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 200000, China.
Yu Lin *School of Computing, College of Engineering, Computing and Cybernetics, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia.
Liang Qiao *Department of Chemistry, and Shanghai Stomatological Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200000, China. liang_qiao@fudan.edu.cn.
Shanghai Stomatological Hospital · CNAustralian National University · AUFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrobiota are closely associated with human health and disease. Metaproteomics can provide a direct means to identify microbial proteins in microbiota for compositional and functional characterization. However, in-depth and accurate metaproteomics is still limited due to the extreme complexity and high diversity of microbiota samples. It is generally recommended to use metagenomic data from the same samples to construct the protein sequence database for metaproteomic data analysis. Although different metagenomics-based database construction strategies have been developed, an optimization of gene taxonomic annotation has not been reported, which, however, is extremely important for accurate metaproteomic analysis.

resultsHerein, we proposed an accurate taxonomic annotation pipeline for genes from metagenomic data, namely contigs directed gene annotation (ConDiGA), and used the method to build a protein sequence database for metaproteomic analysis. We compared our pipeline (ConDiGA or MD3) with two other popular annotation pipelines (MD1 and MD2). In MD1, genes were directly annotated against the whole bacterial genome database; in MD2, contigs were annotated against the whole bacterial genome database and the taxonomic information of contigs was assigned to the genes; in MD3, the most confident species from the contigs annotation results were taken as reference to annotate genes. Annotation tools, including BLAST, Kaiju, and Kraken2, were compared. Based on a synthetic microbial community of 12 species, it was found that Kaiju with the MD3 pipeline outperformed the others in the construction of protein sequence database from metagenomic data. Similar performance was also observed with a fecal sample, as well as in silico mixed datasets of the simulated microbial community and the fecal sample.

conclusionsOverall, we developed an optimized pipeline for gene taxonomic annotation to construct protein sequence databases. Our study can tackle the current taxonomic annotation reliability problem in metagenomics-derived protein sequence database and can promote the in-depth metaproteomic analysis of microbiome. The unique metagenomic and metaproteomic datasets of the 12 bacterial species are publicly available as a standard benchmarking sample for evaluating various analysis pipelines. The code of ConDiGA is open access at GitHub for the analysis of microbiota samples. Video Abstract.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaBacteriaDatabases, ProteinHumansMetagenomeMetagenomicsMolecular Sequence AnnotationReproducibility of ResultsMass spectrometryMetagenomicsMetaproteomicsMicrobiotaTaxonomic annotation

Identifiers

PMID38504332
PMCPMC10949615
OpenAlexW4392964546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.